GrowlTowel said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

historian said:

---

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.

---

Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.

---

I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

---

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.

---

I was on jury duty in May, so I have some fresh memories of Voie Dire. Chief to this situation, I doubt the judge would have allowed anyone on the jury who made up their mind ahead of the trial, and in our panel there were a lot of people who made up their mind and told the lawyers so when asked.

I suspect given the emotional character of this trial, the judge was a lot less interested in having a certain color on the jury, and a lot more interested in jurors who would decide on the evidence.

---

That's his lawyers job. When the defense rested on Monday after 5 or so days of the prosecution case, I knew he was cooked.

His lawyer was supposed to fight for the jury and present a strong defense. His family picked this guy.

---

I have serious doubts that all the blacks in the jury pool were educators. Seems statistically unlikely.

---

First of all, a typical jury pool in Texas consist of around 50 people. For a high profile case, such as this, it would be at least that, if not more, probably 60 to 80. There were more than 3 blacks in the pool.

For voir dire, each person is assigned a number - 1 through 60. During voir dire, each side tries to establish cause (or break cause) for those people seated with the lower numbers.

The pool is excused and the lawyers argue for the Court to remove members of the pool that are ineligible to serve for cause. Cause can mean really anything but it is typical someone that cannot set their biases aside and determine the case based on the facts and the law and instructions given by the judge. Certainly some black members were removed during this stage for cause.

Once these members are removed, each side is given their strikes. I do not know how many each side had but it was certainly more than 3, probably 6 . A strike can be used for any reason other than race, ethnicity, sex, or religion.

After the strikes remove these additional members - the jury is sat starting with the lowest assigned number until reaching 12.

What you are questing is the prosecution striking 3 black members that had low assigned numbers. The stated reason is that these people were educators - a perfectly legal and logical reason to strike them.

---

I was juror number eight on an armed robbery case. The defense negged me and took a former assistant DA and a current DPS sergeant. Hurt my feelings.

Porteroso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

The "black jury" canard is just more disinformation in this case that should not be given oxygen that the tacists so crave.

---

No. Valid thing to wonder about. Many innocent blacks convicted over the years by all white juries. Though in most cases the real blame lies with lying scumbag cops and prosecutors.

---

Sure, it's the 50s. Keep telling yourself that.

You just prove the other point that blacks cannot be objective and convict a black of killing a white person.

---

If you were on trial, and an all black jury, with higher IQ and education than you, were to decide your fate, would you trust that jury?

---

Yes.

Can you name a black defendant wrongfully convicted by an all-white jury because of racism that has occurred in the last 60 years?

---

No, I dont follow general murder trials like that. A quick look at the Innocence projects shows that in May 2026 they got 3 men freed after 28 years behind bars. Seems to fall within your 60 year window. Was it racism? Dunno, but just guess the skin color.

---

If it is not instantly clear why that is problematic it is pointless to attempt to explain it to you.

beardoc said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

historian said:

---

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.

---

Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.

---

I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

---

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.

---

I was on jury duty in May, so I have some fresh memories of Voie Dire. Chief to this situation, I doubt the judge would have allowed anyone on the jury who made up their mind ahead of the trial, and in our panel there were a lot of people who made up their mind and told the lawyers so when asked.

I suspect given the emotional character of this trial, the judge was a lot less interested in having a certain color on the jury, and a lot more interested in jurors who would decide on the evidence.

---

That's his lawyers job. When the defense rested on Monday after 5 or so days of the prosecution case, I knew he was cooked.

His lawyer was supposed to fight for the jury and present a strong defense. His family picked this guy.

---

I have serious doubts that all the blacks in the jury pool were educators. Seems statistically unlikely.

---

First of all, a typical jury pool in Texas consist of around 50 people. For a high profile case, such as this, it would be at least that, if not more, probably 60 to 80. There were more than 3 blacks in the pool.

For voir dire, each person is assigned a number - 1 through 60. During voir dire, each side tries to establish cause (or break cause) for those people seated with the lower numbers.

The pool is excused and the lawyers argue for the Court to remove members of the pool that are ineligible to serve for cause. Cause can mean really anything but it is typical someone that cannot set their biases aside and determine the case based on the facts and the law and instructions given by the judge. Certainly some black members were removed during this stage for cause.

Once these members are removed, each side is given their strikes. I do not know how many each side had but it was certainly more than 3, probably 6 . A strike can be used for any reason other than race, ethnicity, sex, or religion.

After the strikes remove these additional members - the jury is sat starting with the lowest assigned number until reaching 12.

What you are questing is the prosecution striking 3 black members that had low assigned numbers. The stated reason is that these people were educators - a perfectly legal and logical reason to strike them.

---

I was juror number eight on an armed robbery case. The defense negged me and took a former assistant DA and a current DPS sergeant. Hurt my feelings.

---

I had no idea you were black.

Generally speaking, doctors make terrible jurors for a criminal defendant or personal injury plaintiff.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

historian said:

---

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.

---

Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.

---

I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

---

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.

---

All the black potential jurors were struck down because they were educators. Doesn't seem like a valid reason.

---

Have you met a blek educator? My left nut has a higher IQ. No where in the world has hidden more idiotic blek women than "education" and other government jobs. Basically you can have an IQ of 80 and get hired and promoted regardless of performance and accelerated depending on how many Didn't Earn It boxes checked.

---

This is a garbage statement that does no good to society at all. There are brilliant black people all over. There are not so smart people of all races all over as well. While DEI is garbage as well, it is for the same reason. Racist garbage is racist garbage.

---

Re-read and try again (reading comprehension is a wonderful trait). I'm not trying to be a donkey, but it's weird when people respond to a point that was never made.

---

Theres a lot of those types on this board....

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

historian said:

---

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.

---

Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.

---

I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

---

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.

---

All the black potential jurors were struck down because they were educators. Doesn't seem like a valid reason.

---

Have you met a blek educator? My left nut has a higher IQ. No where in the world has hidden more idiotic blek women than "education" and other government jobs. Basically you can have an IQ of 80 and get hired and promoted regardless of performance and accelerated depending on how many Didn't Earn It boxes checked.

---

This is a garbage statement that does no good to society at all. There are brilliant black people all over. There are not so smart people of all races all over as well. While DEI is garbage as well, it is for the same reason. Racist garbage is racist garbage.

---

Re-read and try again (reading comprehension is a wonderful trait). I'm not trying to be a donkey, but it's weird when people respond to a point that was never made.

---

Then talk to me like I am five and tell me what you really meant about black people.

GrowlTowel said:

---

beardoc said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

historian said:

---

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.

---

Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.

---

I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

---

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.

---

I was on jury duty in May, so I have some fresh memories of Voie Dire. Chief to this situation, I doubt the judge would have allowed anyone on the jury who made up their mind ahead of the trial, and in our panel there were a lot of people who made up their mind and told the lawyers so when asked.

I suspect given the emotional character of this trial, the judge was a lot less interested in having a certain color on the jury, and a lot more interested in jurors who would decide on the evidence.

---

That's his lawyers job. When the defense rested on Monday after 5 or so days of the prosecution case, I knew he was cooked.

His lawyer was supposed to fight for the jury and present a strong defense. His family picked this guy.

---

I have serious doubts that all the blacks in the jury pool were educators. Seems statistically unlikely.

---

First of all, a typical jury pool in Texas consist of around 50 people. For a high profile case, such as this, it would be at least that, if not more, probably 60 to 80. There were more than 3 blacks in the pool.

For voir dire, each person is assigned a number - 1 through 60. During voir dire, each side tries to establish cause (or break cause) for those people seated with the lower numbers.

The pool is excused and the lawyers argue for the Court to remove members of the pool that are ineligible to serve for cause. Cause can mean really anything but it is typical someone that cannot set their biases aside and determine the case based on the facts and the law and instructions given by the judge. Certainly some black members were removed during this stage for cause.

Once these members are removed, each side is given their strikes. I do not know how many each side had but it was certainly more than 3, probably 6 . A strike can be used for any reason other than race, ethnicity, sex, or religion.

After the strikes remove these additional members - the jury is sat starting with the lowest assigned number until reaching 12.

What you are questing is the prosecution striking 3 black members that had low assigned numbers. The stated reason is that these people were educators - a perfectly legal and logical reason to strike them.

---

I was juror number eight on an armed robbery case. The defense negged me and took a former assistant DA and a current DPS sergeant. Hurt my feelings.

---

I had no idea you were black.

Generally speaking, doctors make terrible jurors for a criminal defendant or personal injury plaintiff.

---

Doctors make terrible civil jurors as well. We don't listen to instructions and think we know everything. Also, not black.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

historian said:

---

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.

---

Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.

---

I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

---

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.

---

All the black potential jurors were struck down because they were educators. Doesn't seem like a valid reason.

---

I have been looking, but cannot find a source where the occupations of the juror panel were listed. Not surprising, since in most places that is restricted information.

Can you provide a link for your source, please?

---

Mitch, following up on my request, please.

Danielsjackson114 said:

---

Porteso doest give a **** about the black community

Just another lunatic left virtue signaling so his party can regain power

---

True, my community is not the black or white or whatever community, it is the American community. Murica is my tribe. So in this case and all others the color of skin is meaningless, and I only want justice served to a murderer.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

historian said:

---

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.

---

Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.

---

I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

---

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.

---

All the black potential jurors were struck down because they were educators. Doesn't seem like a valid reason.

---

Have you met a blek educator? My left nut has a higher IQ. No where in the world has hidden more idiotic blek women than "education" and other government jobs. Basically you can have an IQ of 80 and get hired and promoted regardless of performance and accelerated depending on how many Didn't Earn It boxes checked.

---

This is a garbage statement that does no good to society at all. There are brilliant black people all over. There are not so smart people of all races all over as well. While DEI is garbage as well, it is for the same reason. Racist garbage is racist garbage.

---

Re-read and try again (reading comprehension is a wonderful trait). I'm not trying to be a donkey, but it's weird when people respond to a point that was never made.

---

Then talk to me like I am five and tell me what you really meant about black people.

---

Most blek women in education and government are not members of Mensa. English is actually reasonable easy to understand.

Curious what about this sentence is confusing?

Have you met a blek educator? My left nut has a higher IQ. No where in the world has hidden more idiotic blek women than "education" and other government jobs.

---

Blanket statement with no backup is useless. Yes I have met a lot of black women who are educators. I find that the black women in education are not what you claim. Are there some that aren't up to the job? Of course there are. But not a majority of the ones I have met.
There are enough problems in the education system, particularly in large inner cities. The quality of educators is less of a problem than the quality of administrators, and those who make up curriculum without setting foot in the classroom to test it.
A long time ago when I was in public education briefly, I had an interview with a white female principal in an intermediate school who would not hire men. I also had an interview with a small town super who was proud his community excluded blacks. Such were their answers to education problems.
Administrators (and fewer of them) who uphold consistent standards for all students in academics and class behavior is what is needed most. Not needed is excluding some group that would also axe some really good people who just happen to be in that umbrella group.

"I am never met a smart one in education, but I am sure there are a few like an endangered species."

On this you are dead wrong. Maybe the district you are in doesn't support teachers enough to get better ones of any race.

There is enough evidence of overplaying race on the left. The right should avoid overplaying race like the plague that it is. Differences? Yes. A majority of dummies in a race? No.

"Watermelon Felon" American

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

historian said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

The "black jury" canard is just more disinformation in this case that should not be given oxygen that the tacists so crave.

---

No. Valid thing to wonder about. Many innocent blacks convicted over the years by all white juries. Though in most cases the real blame lies with lying scumbag cops and prosecutors.

---

All white juries convicting blacks might have been common 100 years ago when the south was 99% Democrat and the Klan was everywhere ("the terrorist arm of the Democrat Party"). Things have been quite different over the past 50 years.

The reality is that blacks commit a disproportionate number of violent crimes statistically. And blacks are almost always the victims of such crimes. They don't usually get much attention. Race hustler politicians (Dems) and fascist propagandists (MSM) aren't interested in gang violence in south Chicago and the like. They prefer to criticize Trump's efforts to fight their crime wave because of TDS and their guilt in fomenting crime.

---

All true. But it is still a valid question, why were all black jurors dismissed, when the defendant was black? You cannot make any logical or reasoned argument that that question, is wrong, or should be ignored. It's clearly a valid question gor many. They get to wonder.

---

Because the color of your skin doesn't determine your opinions. (Unless those opinions disagree with democrats, then the color of your skin is dependent on your opinions) If blacks ARENT racist then the skin tone of the jury is irrelevant. If you ARE racist then you believe blacks MUST have an all black jury for a black defendant because other skins tones are just too racist to judge the law. The idea that we are all the same and equal goes out the window when you demand specific skin tones in the jury box.

---

So representation does not matter, in your opinion?

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Danielsjackson114 said:

---

Most of it because they put themselves in those situations lol

---

That's what he said... the killers of young black males, are almost always young black males.

True that the black community needs to have an internal conversation about it.

---

They need to do a lot more than just have a conversation about it. And the left - especially including the MSM - needs to stop excusing it, condoning it, and even encouraging it (won't happen of course).

---

You gotta start by talking about it, acknowledging the issue. These young males need guidance from older, wiser men and women. And right or wrong, they will listen to people who look like them more than anyone else.

---

The problem is that wont happen. As you can see with this Karmelo stuff almost every black person older or younger is excusing what he did. There's just no accountabilty and people want to place blame everrywhere but on the actual people who are causing the problem.

---

Get a grip. You have heard or read the opinions of very few black people. You would hear a lot of whites doing the same were the skin colors reversed.

Don't look at a very small sample size of vocal zealots and ascribe their thoughts to aentire demographic. Insane.

---

I'm wondering if you STILL believe that it's racist to think that the BLM movement pushed a false narrative, in light of the fact that the narrative undoubtedly contributed significantly to Karmelo Anthony's mindset and actions.

---

Denying that black lives matter will always be racist. You can stop asking when it will cease to be true.

---

Except that's not what I asked you. I asked if you believe it is still racist to say that the BLM movement pushed a false narrative.

If you do not see the clear link between the mindset of young blacks today like Karmelo Anthony and the BLM narrative - rather, LIE - that was pushed onto the country, then you remain the same clueless poster that first uttered that ridiculous comment.

---

Every step of the way you misrepresented what I said. Black lives matter was not just a slogan but the narrative itself for millions. You can argue about the sub narrative, or what those who bought to monetize basic human decency wanted to turn it into, but do blacks matter? Yes, the same as anyone else. Hundreds of millions worldwide agreed that it needed to be said, out loud. People who dont think black lives matter, are racist. This was the last time I peck it out on my phone.

---

Stop lying. I never misrepresented you. No one believes you that I did, because they read your comments with their own eyes and even watched you double, triple, quadruple down on it. You clearly stated that believing BLM pushed a false narrative was racist. Your stance was based on your general cluelessness and one-dimensional appraisal of the whole BLM movement. It's painfully apparent that you STILL do not understand that the meaning of "black lives matter" is NOT simply that blacks lives matter. There is an accusatory insinuation behind it, and that's where the lie is. And that's what continually goes over your head.

I had hoped you were finally able to realize this, now that some time has past and maybe you grew up a little and your eyes have been opened a bit, especially in light of the surge in black violence against whites ever since the BLM movement. But it looks like there's a permanent defecit, and so I won't be holding out hope that you'll be able to acknowledge the link between BLM and Karmelo Anthony's actions - something that I believe democrats sorely need to understand.

---

What a ridiculous statement. Are you going backwards too? Black on white crime from from 2001 also blamed on BLM?

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

The "black jury" canard is just more disinformation in this case that should not be given oxygen that the tacists so crave.

---

No. Valid thing to wonder about. Many innocent blacks convicted over the years by all white juries. Though in most cases the real blame lies with lying scumbag cops and prosecutors.

---

Sure, it's the 50s. Keep telling yourself that.

You just prove the other point that blacks cannot be objective and convict a black of killing a white person.

---

If you were on trial, and an all black jury, with higher IQ and education than you, were to decide your fate, would you trust that jury?

---

Yes.

Can you name a black defendant wrongfully convicted by an all-white jury because of racism that has occurred in the last 60 years?

---

No, I dont follow general murder trials like that. A quick look at the Innocence projects shows that in May 2026 they got 3 men freed after 28 years behind bars. Seems to fall within your 60 year window. Was it racism? Dunno, but just guess the skin color.

---

If it is not instantly clear why that is problematic it is pointless to attempt to explain it to you.

---

So 28 years ago, racism couldn't have been a factor in a wrongful conviction of black men? Racism was dead in 1998?

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

historian said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

The "black jury" canard is just more disinformation in this case that should not be given oxygen that the tacists so crave.

---

No. Valid thing to wonder about. Many innocent blacks convicted over the years by all white juries. Though in most cases the real blame lies with lying scumbag cops and prosecutors.

---

All white juries convicting blacks might have been common 100 years ago when the south was 99% Democrat and the Klan was everywhere ("the terrorist arm of the Democrat Party"). Things have been quite different over the past 50 years.

The reality is that blacks commit a disproportionate number of violent crimes statistically. And blacks are almost always the victims of such crimes. They don't usually get much attention. Race hustler politicians (Dems) and fascist propagandists (MSM) aren't interested in gang violence in south Chicago and the like. They prefer to criticize Trump's efforts to fight their crime wave because of TDS and their guilt in fomenting crime.

---

All true. But it is still a valid question, why were all black jurors dismissed, when the defendant was black? You cannot make any logical or reasoned argument that that question, is wrong, or should be ignored. It's clearly a valid question gor many. They get to wonder.

---

Because the color of your skin doesn't determine your opinions. (Unless those opinions disagree with democrats, then the color of your skin is dependent on your opinions) If blacks ARENT racist then the skin tone of the jury is irrelevant. If you ARE racist then you believe blacks MUST have an all black jury for a black defendant because other skins tones are just too racist to judge the law. The idea that we are all the same and equal goes out the window when you demand specific skin tones in the jury box.

---

So representation does not matter, in your opinion?

---

Based on skin tone? No.

Carl Higbie gets it:

If this is real, then this guy can rot in hail

👁️READ: A man spotted urinating directly on or over Austin Metcalf’s grave marker in a cemetery.

Supporters of Anthony have harassed Metcalf’s friends/family outside court (spitting, threats like “F*** Austin,” “you should be dead with him,” and explicitly saying they’d “piss on… pic.twitter.com/MuLlUnvITW

— Michael Khieu (@kingkhieu) June 12, 2026

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

historian said:

---

I saw a TV broadcast with this info. I cannot say where it was from but it wasn't fringe.

---

Regardless it is irrelevant, and we should stop pretending it matters.

---

I agree. But I wish some media would focus on it to put the "all white jury" bs to rest that the left is pushing.

---

I get the strong feeling that not having any blacks on the jury wasn't from a lack of trying. Judging from the sentiment of many blacks after the verdict, it was probably difficult to find potential black jurors who didn't clearly have it in mind to let Karmelo Anthony off the hook no matter what.

---

All the black potential jurors were struck down because they were educators. Doesn't seem like a valid reason.

---

In a case dealing with violence on school grounds it does. To me it is similar to why no educators are chosen when it is a trial of a teacher charged with crimes against students

Porteroso said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Danielsjackson114 said:

---

Most of it because they put themselves in those situations lol

---

That's what he said... the killers of young black males, are almost always young black males.

True that the black community needs to have an internal conversation about it.

---

They need to do a lot more than just have a conversation about it. And the left - especially including the MSM - needs to stop excusing it, condoning it, and even encouraging it (won't happen of course).

---

You gotta start by talking about it, acknowledging the issue. These young males need guidance from older, wiser men and women. And right or wrong, they will listen to people who look like them more than anyone else.

---

The problem is that wont happen. As you can see with this Karmelo stuff almost every black person older or younger is excusing what he did. There's just no accountabilty and people want to place blame everrywhere but on the actual people who are causing the problem.

---

Get a grip. You have heard or read the opinions of very few black people. You would hear a lot of whites doing the same were the skin colors reversed.

Don't look at a very small sample size of vocal zealots and ascribe their thoughts to aentire demographic. Insane.

---

I'm wondering if you STILL believe that it's racist to think that the BLM movement pushed a false narrative, in light of the fact that the narrative undoubtedly contributed significantly to Karmelo Anthony's mindset and actions.

---

Denying that black lives matter will always be racist. You can stop asking when it will cease to be true.

---

Except that's not what I asked you. I asked if you believe it is still racist to say that the BLM movement pushed a false narrative.

If you do not see the clear link between the mindset of young blacks today like Karmelo Anthony and the BLM narrative - rather, LIE - that was pushed onto the country, then you remain the same clueless poster that first uttered that ridiculous comment.

---

Every step of the way you misrepresented what I said. Black lives matter was not just a slogan but the narrative itself for millions. You can argue about the sub narrative, or what those who bought to monetize basic human decency wanted to turn it into, but do blacks matter? Yes, the same as anyone else. Hundreds of millions worldwide agreed that it needed to be said, out loud. People who dont think black lives matter, are racist. This was the last time I peck it out on my phone.

---

Stop lying. I never misrepresented you. No one believes you that I did, because they read your comments with their own eyes and even watched you double, triple, quadruple down on it. You clearly stated that believing BLM pushed a false narrative was racist. Your stance was based on your general cluelessness and one-dimensional appraisal of the whole BLM movement. It's painfully apparent that you STILL do not understand that the meaning of "black lives matter" is NOT simply that blacks lives matter. There is an accusatory insinuation behind it, and that's where the lie is. And that's what continually goes over your head.

I had hoped you were finally able to realize this, now that some time has past and maybe you grew up a little and your eyes have been opened a bit, especially in light of the surge in black violence against whites ever since the BLM movement. But it looks like there's a permanent defecit, and so I won't be holding out hope that you'll be able to acknowledge the link between BLM and Karmelo Anthony's actions - something that I believe democrats sorely need to understand.

---

What a ridiculous statement. Are you going backwards too? Black on white crime from from 2001 also blamed on BLM?

---

Again, no one is surprised that it's gone over your head. It goes right along with many of your previous stances, for example where you said that parents who took their children to drag queen story hour were doing wrong, but the drag queens themselves weren't doing wrong. There just seems to be a short circuit in your brain that prevents you from making the connection on many issues.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

The "black jury" canard is just more disinformation in this case that should not be given oxygen that the tacists so crave.

---

No. Valid thing to wonder about. Many innocent blacks convicted over the years by all white juries. Though in most cases the real blame lies with lying scumbag cops and prosecutors.

---

Sure, it's the 50s. Keep telling yourself that.

You just prove the other point that blacks cannot be objective and convict a black of killing a white person.

---

If you were on trial, and an all black jury, with higher IQ and education than you, were to decide your fate, would you trust that jury?

---

Yes.

Can you name a black defendant wrongfully convicted by an all-white jury because of racism that has occurred in the last 60 years?

---

No, I dont follow general murder trials like that. A quick look at the Innocence projects shows that in May 2026 they got 3 men freed after 28 years behind bars. Seems to fall within your 60 year window. Was it racism? Dunno, but just guess the skin color.

---

If it is not instantly clear why that is problematic it is pointless to attempt to explain it to you.

---

So 28 years ago, racism couldn't have been a factor in a wrongful conviction of black men? Racism was dead in 1998?

---

Share an example. Otherwise you're tilting at windmills.

---

https://innocenceproject.org/news/batson-v-kentucky-racially-biased-jury-selection-40-years-later/
Interesting read.

But here is the link I googled for you. Don Quixote put way more effort in, than a few googles, by the way. Make white knights great again!

https://innocenceproject.org/news/philadelphia-men-exonerated-jermal-shuler-brittingham-turner/